Returning Subscriber?
Not a Subscriber to Litigation Pathfinder?
Get the full text of this legal issue, including links to cited primary law, along with unlimited access 1,000’s of other legal issues…and more!
Area of Law: | Litigation & Procedure |
Keywords: | Notice of removal; Time for filing |
Jurisdiction: | Federal |
Cited Cases: | 652 F. Supp. 740; 678 F. Supp. 236 |
Cited Statutes: | 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b); 29 U.S.C. § 185; 12 U.S.C. §Ê1819, |
Date: | 02/01/2001 |
A notice of removal more than thirty days after receipt of a summons and complaint is considered untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) unless it can be demonstrated that the original complaint was not removable and that the facts showing the case is removable were not discovered until some later date. Support for removal include: Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Crowe, 652 F. Supp. 740 (N.D. Tex. 1984) and Riggs v. Continental Baking Co., 678 F. Supp. 236 (N.D. Cal. 1988). Riggs dealt with removal under the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185; in Crowe the court addressed removal under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 12 U.S.C. §Ê1819, and stated the issue of timing very precisely: “The question is thus when the FDIC first received a pleading or paper from which it could ascertain that the case was or had become removable.” 652 F. Supp. at 742.
[…]
Subscribe to Litigation Pathfinder
To get the full-text of this Legal Memorandum ... and more!
(Month-to-month and annual subscriptions available)
Get the full text of this legal issue, including links to cited primary law, along with unlimited access 1,000’s of other legal issues…and more!